Share This Story!

Greenville police to strengthen compliance with open records law

It's become standard practice for police to release one-line incident reports while the real details are hidden in documents that police have often refused to release to the public — in violation of the state's

This story is part of a series for Sunshine Week, an annual push by media outlets and open-government advocates for transparency that runs March 15-21.

On the morning of Jan. 13, a sexual predator attacked a woman off East North Street, holding the victim against her will while he sexually assaulted her, according to warrants released after a suspect had been apprehended.

But residents of that neighborhood would have had no way of knowing what the victim told police that morning had they asked to see the incident report initially filed at the Greenville Police Department.

The official incident report — a document that's public record and available at the police records office — contained a single one-line summary in which the responding officer wrote that he "arrived at the incident location in response to an assault already occurred call."

The report listed the incident location as Hilton Street near Cowan Court, nearly three miles away from the area off East North Street identified in the subsequent warrant as the scene of the crime. And there was no mention the investigation quickly turned to someone who police suspected had previously assaulted numerous other women in the same area.

All of that would come out more than 24 hours later, and only after an arrest had been made in the case.

Reports disclosing scant details to the public have become standard practice in recent years at the Greenville Police Department and other agencies across the state. The details of what occurred, in many cases, are found in supplemental reports that police have not made readily available to the public and news media.

Instead, the initial release of information by police often lacks enough details that could lead the public to provide investigators with critical early clues that might help solve the case, or assist residents in taking safety precautions they may deem appropriate.

Greenville Police Chief Ken Miller said the incident reports he's reviewed don't provide enough information for the public to understand what occurred. Instead, they ought to spell out in general terms what took place and how the crime unfolded.

Legal experts say the routine of issuing one-line incident reports while withholding supplemental reports that detail the crimes violates the state Freedom of Information Act.

Jay Bender, attorney for the South Carolina Press Association, said that state lawmakers rewrote the state Freedom of Information Act in 1998 to make clear that supplemental reports are considered public records and do not provide authorities with a loophole to withhold information previously included in incident reports.

"Law enforcement agencies in many instances have people in the position to deny access to records," Bender said. "The phrase 'incident report' was removed (from the statute's wording) just because of such an effort by a police agency to withhold information from the public."

The current law requires police to release all reports that disclose the nature, substance and location of crimes.

After The Greenville News met with Greenville City Attorney Mike Pitts last week to discuss the practice of withholding supplemental reports from the public, the police department said it would take steps to be more forthcoming with detailed incident reports.

Police said the practice wasn't police policy but the result of confusion over the specific reports being requested. Police said they never intended to deny access to public records and maintained that they're committed to releasing information the public has the right to know.

The department's public information officer, Johnathan Bragg, said previous requests from the media didn't specify which officer's supplemental report was being requested and that there was confusion over the information being sought.

Bragg said police will begin to routinely provide supplemental reports filed by the primary responding officer when asked without requiring a written request.

Other Upstate law enforcement agencies have released similar, sparsely detailed reports and required the public to submit Freedom of Information Act requests if they wanted to know more about crimes that range from homicides and bank robberies to car break-ins and thefts.

Some agencies have in the past denied those requests on the grounds that the information is exempt from public release as long as the case remains under investigation.

"There is no blanket 'under investigation' exemption," Bender said.

In some cases there may be certain "narrowly defined" information exempt under the law's provisions, Bender said, such as details about undercover operations or descriptions of witnesses that could put them in danger.

But Bender said police must show that releasing such information would harm their agency in a specific way. "They just can't say it's under investigation," he said.

After reviewing some of the one-line police reports Greenville Police have released to the public, Pitts said supplemental reports are public records subject to inspection.

Pitts said police are permitted to redact or delete sensitive items such as Social Security numbers or home addresses to protect identities, but that they cannot withhold the entire report.

Miller, meanwhile, said he would work with officers and train the department on what incident reports ought to look like, though his top concern is that releasing details too soon would jeopardize the investigation.

Sunshine Week is a national initiative to promote a dialogue about the importance of open government and freedom of information. Participants include news media, civic groups, libraries, nonprofits, schools and others interested in the public's right to know.